DNSEXT Working Group Brian Wellington (Nominum)
INTERNET-DRAFT Olafur Gudmundsson (NAI Labs)
<draft-ietf-dnsext-ad-is-secure-01.txt> January 2001
Updates: RFC 2535
Redefinition of DNS AD bit
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.''
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Comments should be sent to the authors or the DNSEXT WG mailing list
namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
This draft expires on July 19, 2001.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All rights reserved.
Abstract
Based on implementation experience, the current definition of the AD
bit in the DNS header is not useful. This draft changes the
specification so that the AD bit is only set on answers where
signatures have been cryptographically verified.
Expires July 2001 [Page 1]

INTERNET-DRAFT AD bit set on secure answers January 20011 - Introduction
Familiarity with the DNS system [RFC1035] and DNS security extensions
[RFC2535] is helpful but not necessary.
As specified in RFC 2535 (section 6.1), the AD bit indicates in a
response that all the data included in the answer and authority
portion of the response has been authenticated by the server
according to the policies of that server. This is not especially
useful in practice, since a conformant server should never reply with
data that failed its security policy.
This draft proposes to redefine the AD bit such that it is only set
if all data in the response has been cryptographically verified.
Thus, a response containing properly delegated insecure data will not
have AD set, as will a response from a server configured without
DNSSEC keys. As before, data which failed to verify will not be
returned. An application can then use the value of the AD bit to
determine if the data is secure or not.
1.1 - Requirements
The key words "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119.
1.2 - Updated documents and sections
The definition of the AD bit in RFC2535, Section 6.1, is changed.
2 - Setting of AD bitSection 6.1 of RFC2535 says:
"The AD bit MUST NOT be set on a response unless all of the RRs in
the answer and authority sections of the response are either
Authenticated or Insecure."
The changes are to delete the words "either" and "or Insecure" from
the sentence.
The replacement text reads:
"The AD bit MUST NOT be set on a response unless all of the RRsets in
the answer and authority sections of the response are Authenticated."
Expires July 2001 [Page 2]

INTERNET-DRAFT AD bit set on secure answers January 2001
If the answer section contains any data, the server MUST NOT include
data in the authority section that would cause the AD bit to be
unset.
The AD bit MUST NOT be set on a response unless all of the RRsets in
the answer and authority sections are Authenticated.
A resolver MUST NOT blindly trust the AD bit unless it communicates
with the server over secure transport mechanism or using message
authentication such as TSIG[RFC2845] or SIG(0)[RFC2931], and the
resolver policy is that it can trust the server.
A DNS server following this modified specification will only set the
AD bit when it has cryptographically verified the data in the answer.
In the case of a primary server for a secure zone, the data MAY be
considered Authenticated, depending on local policy. Secondary
servers SHOULD NOT consider data Authenticated unless the zone was
transfered securely or the data was verified.
3 - Interpretation of the AD bit
A response containing data marked Insecure in the answer or authority
section will never have the AD bit set. In this case, the resolver
SHOULD treat the data as Insecure whether or not SIG records are
present.
4 - Security Considerations:
This document redefines a bit in the DNS header. If a resolver
trusts the value of the AD bit, it must be sure that the server is
using the updated definition.
5 - IANA Considerations:
None
6 - Acknowledgments:
The following people have provided input on this document: Andreas
Gustafsson, Bob Halley, Steven Jacob.
References:
[RFC1035] P. Mockapetris, ``Domain Names - Implementation and
Specification'', STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC2535] D. Eastlake, ``Domain Name System Security Extensions'', RFC2535, March 1999.
Expires July 2001 [Page 3]

INTERNET-DRAFT AD bit set on secure answers January 2001
[RFC2845] P. Vixie, O. Gudmundsson, D. Eastlake, B. Wellington,
``Secret Key Transaction Authentication for DNS (TSIG)'', RFC2845, May 2000.
[RFC2931] D. Eastlake, ``DNS Request and Transaction Signatures
(SIG(0))'', RFC 2931, September 2000.
Authors Addresses
Brian Wellington Olafur Gudmundsson
Nominum Inc. NAI Labs
950 Charter Street 3060 Washington Road (Rt. 97)
Redwood City, CA, 94063 Glenwood, MD, 21738
USA USA
+1 650 381 6022 +1 443 259 2389
<Brian.Wellington@nominum.com> <ogud@tislabs.com>
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
Expires July 2001 [Page 4]